% This file was created with JabRef 2.5.
% Encoding: UTF8

@ARTICLE{Abeysekera2007,
  author = {Indra Abeysekera},
  title = {Intellectual capital reporting between a developing and developed
	nation},
  journal = {Journal of Intellectual Capital},
  year = {2007},
  volume = {8},
  pages = {329 - 345},
  number = {2},
  abstract = {This paper aims to examine the patterns of intellectual capital reporting
	(ICR) of large listed firms in a developing nation, Sri Lanka. The
	aim of this study is to highlight the differences in ICR practice
	between developing and developed nations. 
	
	Design/methodology/approach The paper begins by examining each of
	the top 30 firms by market capitalization listed on the Colombo stock
	exchange in 1998/1999 and 1999/2000. Using the content analysis method,
	it reviews the annual reports of these firms to determine the types
	of intellectual capital (IC) items reported in Sri Lanka. It then
	compares these findings with a similar study undertaken in Australia
	during the same period. 
	
	Findings The findings in this paper highlight the need for a uniform
	ICR definition and a reporting framework that provides comparative
	and consistent reporting under the auspices of a regulatory body.
	ICR differences were identified between Sri Lankan and Australian
	firms, and it is argued that these differences can be attributed
	to economic, social and political factors. 
	
	Practical implications This paper highlights important policy issues
	for Australia, Sri Lanka and other nations. These issues are even
	more pertinent in the light of the gradual international adoption
	of the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRSs), formulated
	by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). 
	
	Originality/value Most papers on intellectual capital reporting have
	focused on firms in developed countries. This paper offers insights
	into comparative reporting practices between a developed and a developing
	country.},
  doi = {10.1108/14691930710742871},
  keywords = {Australia, Intellectual capital, Sri Lanka},
  owner = {Administrator},
  timestamp = {2007.05.01},
  url = {http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/14691930710742871}
}

@ARTICLE{Andreas2007,
  author = {Andreas N. Andreou AND Annie Green AND Michael Stankosky},
  title = {A framework of intangible valuation areas and antecedents},
  journal = {Journal of Intellectual Capital},
  year = {2007},
  volume = {8},
  pages = {52 - 75},
  number = {1},
  abstract = {Purpose: The paper seeks to develop a list of operational knowledge
	assets as antecedents to a validated common taxonomy of intangible
	strategic value drivers. 
	
	Design/methodology/approach 鈥� Qualitative data from focus groups
	was collected to validate a theory-based list. The list contains
	the value generation activities (i.e. performance focus areas) and
	their respective critical success factors emerging from the interaction
	of eight validated intangible value drivers. Two primary questions
	were addressed at the focus groups: What performance focus areas
	does the organization need to focus on?; and What knowledge do employees
	need to leverage within each focus area? Data were analyzed using
	template analysis. Structural equation modeling using PLS was performed
	to develop a theory about the impact of the list of operational knowledge
	assets on intellectual capital and business performance measures.
	
	
	Findings 鈥� A validated list of knowledge assets called the list of
	operational knowledge assets (LOKA) was developed comprising 31 categories
	(i.e. critical success factors) grouped into seven value generating
	activities (i.e. performance focus areas). The thematic dimensions
	of each category surface internal views of a business that define
	the strategic and operational value drivers that are aligned with
	organizational performance. 
	
	Research limitations/implications 鈥� The list is not an exhaustive
	one but rather a template that can be adapted based on the industry
	investigated. The scope of the study was focused on the high-tech
	federal contractors in the USA. Therefore the results and related
	models of this study are generic in nature. Future research could
	focus applying the study on different environments (i.e. organizational,
	cultural, type of knowledge workers) and compare results. 
	
	Practical implications 鈥� The paper could improve managers' understanding
	of the human capital drivers on performance and thus facilitate better
	resource allocation on human capital management practices, technology
	investments, process improvements and business intelligence functions.
	
	
	Originality/value 鈥� The list of operational knowledge assets presents
	a first attempt in addressing the lack of understanding of the knowledge
	assets that managers need to leverage at the lowest level of operational
	granularity.},
  doi = {10.1108/14691930710715060},
  keywords = {Critical success factors, Drivers, Intangible assets, Modelling, Value
	analysis},
  owner = {Administrator},
  timestamp = {2007.05.09},
  url = {http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/14691930710715060}
}

@ARTICLE{ardichvili2003mab,
  author = {Ardichvili, A. and Page, V. and Wentling, T.},
  title = {{Motivation and barriers to participation in virtual knowledge-sharing
	communities of practice}},
  journal = {Journal of Knowledge Management},
  year = {2003},
  volume = {7},
  pages = {64--77},
  number = {1},
  publisher = {MCB UP Ltd}
}

@ARTICLE{bose2003eeo,
  author = {Sanjoy Bose and Kok-boon Oh},
  title = {An empirical evaluation of option pricing in intellectual capital},
  journal = {Journal of Intellectual Capital},
  year = {2003},
  volume = {4},
  pages = {382--395},
  number = {3},
  doi = {10.1108/14691930310487824},
  keywords = {intellectual property, asset evaluation},
  publisher = {Emerald Group Publishing Limited}
}

@ARTICLE{brachos2007kes,
  author = {Brachos, D. and Kostopoulos, K. and Soderquist, K.E. and Prastacos,
	G.},
  title = {Knowledge effectiveness, social context and innovation},
  journal = {Journal of Knowledge Management},
  year = {2007},
  volume = {11},
  pages = {31--44},
  number = {5}
}

@ARTICLE{burtonjones2001ksm,
  author = {Burton-Jones, A.},
  title = {{The knowledge supply model: a framework for developing education
	and training in the new economy}},
  journal = {Education+ Training},
  year = {2001},
  volume = {43},
  pages = {225--232},
  number = {4}
}

@ARTICLE{cecezkecmanovic2001eap,
  author = {Cecez-Kecmanovic, D.},
  title = {What enables and prevents knowledge-sharing via computer-mediated
	communications},
  journal = {Journal of Systems and Information Technology},
  year = {2001},
  volume = {5},
  pages = {115--134},
  number = {1}
}

@ARTICLE{Diefenbach2006,
  author = {T. Diefenbach},
  title = {Intangible resources: a categorial system of knowledge and other
	intangible assets},
  journal = {Journal of Intellectual Capital},
  year = {2006},
  volume = {7},
  pages = {406 - 420},
  number = {3},
  abstract = {Purpose 鈥� There are several strands that cope with particular intangible
	resources, such as intangible assets, intellectual, human, and organisational
	capital, data and information, knowledge and capabilities. However,
	until now there have been no attempts to define and identify all
	intangible resources systematically in one framework. The purpose
	of this paper is to show how an exhaustive and exclusive categorial
	system of all intangible resources can be generated. 
	
	Design/methodology/approach 鈥� Following the idea of comparative analyses
	by grounded theory, it will be referred to relevant approaches which
	can be defined in academic literature. It is investigated how types
	of intangible resources, that share common attributes, can be grouped
	together, which categories emerge, and how these categories can be
	defined. This gradually leads to the creation of the whole categorial
	system based on empirical inductionism. At the same time, the categorial
	system is created based on logical deductionism. Having defined intangible
	resources as the objects of reasoning and by which leading principles
	will be looked at, the class of intangible resources will be broken
	down into categories or sub-classes with the help of precisely formulated
	attributes. 
	
	Findings 鈥� Generation of a comprehensive, consistent, and complete
	categorial system of all possible types of intangible assets. 
	
	Research limitations/implications 鈥� Solely a theoretical paper. Although
	empirical examples are provided it might be interesting to demonstrate
	the application of this categorial system. 
	
	Practical implications 鈥� With such a categorial system we are in
	the position to identify and locate the uncountable number of 鈥渞eal
	world鈥� types of intangible resources more precisely and efficiently.
	
	
	Originality/value 鈥� With such an attempt it may become clearer how
	to cope with different types of intangible resources, how to gather,
	create, use, share and develop them more appropriately.},
  doi = {10.1108/14691930610681483},
  keywords = {Intangible assets, Knowledge management, Resource management},
  owner = {Administrator},
  timestamp = {2007.05.11},
  url = {http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/14691930610681483}
}

@ARTICLE{dube2005isc,
  author = {Dub{\'e}, L. and Bourhis, A. and Jacob, R.},
  title = {{The impact of structuring characteristics on the launching of virtual
	communities of practice}},
  journal = {Journal of Organizational Change Management},
  year = {2005},
  volume = {18},
  pages = {145--166},
  number = {2}
}

@ARTICLE{John2007,
  author = {John C. Dumay AND John A. Tull},
  title = {Intellectual capital disclosure and price-sensitive Australian Stock
	Exchange announcements},
  journal = {Journal of Intellectual Capital},
  year = {2007},
  volume = {8},
  pages = {236 - 255},
  number = {2},
  abstract = {Purpose 鈥� The purpose of this paper is to examine an alternative
	way by which firms can disclose their intellectual capital to external
	stakeholders who have an influence on their share price. 
	
	Design/methodology/approach 鈥� The paper shows that, by applying the
	empirical 鈥渆vent studies鈥� methodology for the 2004-2005 financial
	year, the components of intellectual capital are used to classify
	price-sensitive company announcements to the Australian Stock Exchange
	(ASX), and to examine any relationship between the disclosure of
	intellectual capital and the cumulative abnormal return of a firm's
	share price. 
	
	Findings 鈥� The disclosure of intellectual capital elements in price
	sensitive company announcements can have an effect on the cumulative
	abnormal return of a firm's share price. The market is found to be
	most responsive to disclosures of 鈥渋nternal capital鈥� elements. 
	
	Research limitations/implications 鈥� The paper is limited to an analysis
	of the Australian stock market for a one-year period. It does not
	take into account the timing of announcement as a variable nor does
	it consider differences in regulation or operations pertaining to
	other stock markets. 
	
	Practical implications 鈥� Researchers and practitioners are now informed
	that price-sensitive disclosures to the market containing intellectual
	capital elements have a marginal effect on the subsequent market
	valuation of a firm beyond traditional financial reports and external
	intellectual capital reports. 
	
	Originality/value 鈥� The paper is the first to examine the disclosure
	of price-sensitive stock market information from an intellectual
	capital perspective, using Australian data.},
  doi = {10.1108/14691930710742826},
  keywords = {Australia, Disclosure, Intellectual capital, Share prices, Stock exchanges},
  owner = {Administrator},
  timestamp = {2007.04.30},
  url = {http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/14691930710742826}
}

@ARTICLE{garavan2007mic,
  author = {Garavan, T.N. and Carbery, R. and Murphy, E.},
  title = {{Managing intentionally created communities of practice for knowledge
	sourcing across organisational boundaries: Insights on the role of
	the CoP manager}},
  journal = {The Learning Organization: An International Journal},
  year = {2007},
  volume = {14},
  pages = {34--49},
  number = {1},
  publisher = {Emerald Group Publishing Limited}
}

@ARTICLE{Dipankar2007,
  author = {Dipankar Ghosh AND Anne Wu},
  title = {Intellectual capital and capital markets: additional evidence},
  journal = {Journal of Intellectual Capital},
  year = {2007},
  volume = {8},
  pages = {216 - 235},
  number = {2},
  abstract = {Purpose 鈥� The purpose of this paper is to first examine whether intellectual
	capital (IC) information is considered in firm valuation. Next, to
	examine two issues: financial analysts' investment recommendations
	when faced with different combinations of performance levels (i.e.
	above or below industry average) of financial and IC measures, and
	the role of financial and IC measures with different performance
	levels and holding periods (i.e. short-term vs long-term) for the
	investment on analysts' recommendations. 
	
	Design/methodology/approach 鈥� The first part of the paper used secondary
	(both archival and survey) data. The second part was an experiment.
	
	
	Findings 鈥� The findings in the first part show that, after controlling
	for the effect of financial performances on firm value, measures
	of IC are still significant explanatory variables (of firm value).
	The second part shows that the financial and IC measures affect financial
	analysts' investment recommendations differently depending on the
	measures' levels of performance and the time horizon for holding
	the investments. 
	
	Research limitations/implications 鈥� The limitations of the paper
	are as follows: the use of secondary data from a single country limits
	its generalizability; and the results of the experiment are parameterized
	by the research design such as the amount of information provided
	to the financial analysts. Extending the analyses to other settings
	and using time-series data represent future research opportunities.
	
	
	Originality/value 鈥� The research makes three contributions to the
	IC literature. First, it extends the studies on the relevance of
	IC in capital market research by broadening its scope to include
	measures of IC other than R&D intensity. Next, it provides evidence
	of the informativeness of IC measures in market valuation of firms
	and analysts' recommendations, thus lending credence to the arguments
	of reports and researchers for more external communication of IC
	information. Finally, this study is one of the first to examine a
	broader scope of IC in the capital market context and the use of
	IC by sophisticated market participants. With policy-makers and standard-setting
	bodies considering proposals to enhance information on IC in financial
	reports, it is important to broaden the scope of IC metrics and understand
	their role in enhancing firm value to develop a framework for reporting
	IC.},
  doi = {10.1108/14691930710742817},
  keywords = {Capital markets, Financial performance, Intellectual capital},
  owner = {Administrator},
  timestamp = {2007.04.30},
  url = {http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/14691930710742817}
}

@ARTICLE{Gourlay:February,
  author = {Gourlay, Stephen},
  title = {Towards conceptual clarity for tacit knowledge: a review of empirical
	studies},
  journal = {Knowledge Management Research \& Practice},
  year = {February 2006},
  volume = {4},
  pages = {60-69},
  abstract = {Tacit knowledge is important for organizations and management, but
	we lack adequate theory, and find conflicting claims about the concept.
	A review of empirical studies of tacit knowledge phenomena found
	the term has been applied to both articulable and inarticulable knowledge.
	It is suggested that in the interests of clarity use of the term
	should be limited to the latter. Tacit knowledge appears due to both
	experience with the particular objects it is applied to, and to general
	experiences. A solution to the problem of tacit knowledge explication
	is proposed, and implications of the study for both managerial and
	academic practice are outlined.Knowledge Management Research &#38;
	Practice (2006) 4, 60&#8211;69. doi:10.1057/palgrave.kmrp.8500082},
  doi = {doi:10.1057/palgrave.kmrp.8500082},
  url = {http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/pal/kmrp/2006/00000004/00000001/art00007}
}

@ARTICLE{Haya2007,
  author = {Glenn Haya AND Else Nygren AND Wilhelm Widmark},
  title = {Metalib and Google Scholar: a user study},
  journal = {Online Information Review},
  year = {2007},
  volume = {31},
  pages = {365 - 375},
  number = {3},
  abstract = {Purpose 鈥� This paper aims to understand how students experience the
	search tools Google Scholar and Metalib and the role of prior instruction.
	
	Design/methodology/approach 鈥� A total of 32 undergraduate students
	searched academic articles for their thesis work. Searches were recorded
	using Morae software and were analysed along with the number of articles
	saved and responses to a questionnaire. All searched with both tools.
	Half of the students received training before searching.
	
	Findings 鈥� Google Scholar performed better in almost all measures.
	Training had a positive effect on the amount and quality of articles
	saved. Responses to Google Scholar were more positive than to Metalib.
	However, the students were not overwhelmingly enthusiastic about
	either of the tools.
	
	Research limitations/implications 鈥� Each Metalib implementation is
	to some extent unique, which limits the extent to which results can
	be generalised to other implementations.
	
	Practical implications 鈥� Training is valuable for both tools. The
	user interface to Metalib does not conform with students' expectations
	and needs further improvement. Both tools strive to be a first alternative
	search tool for academic literature but neither performed well enough
	in this study to recommend it to be used in that role in an academic
	library setting.
	
	Originality/value 鈥� These tools are important to academic libraries
	but few user studies have been published, particularly on Google
	Scholar. To one's knowledge no other user study on these tools has
	looked at the effects of instruction.},
  doi = {10.1108/14684520710764122},
  keywords = {Customer satisfaction, Research methods, Search engines, Students,
	User interfaces},
  owner = {Administrator},
  timestamp = {2007.12.07},
  url = {http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/14684520710764122}
}

@ARTICLE{Hedgebeth2007,
  author = {Darius Hedgebeth},
  title = {Making use of knowledge sharing technologies},
  journal = {VINE},
  year = {2007},
  volume = {37},
  pages = {49-55},
  number = {1},
  keywords = {Knowledge management, Knowledge sharing},
  owner = {fox},
  timestamp = {2008.08.19}
}

@ARTICLE{Jacso2005,
  author = {P茅ter Jacs贸},
  title = {Google Scholar: the pros and the cons},
  journal = {Online Information Review},
  year = {2005},
  volume = {29},
  pages = {208 - 214},
  number = {2},
  abstract = {Purpose 鈥� To identify the pros and the cons of Google Scholar.
	
	Design/methodology/approach 鈥� Chronicles the recent history of the
	Google Scholar search engine from its inception in November 2004
	and critiques it with regard to its merits and demerits.
	
	Findings 鈥� Feels that there are massive content omissions presently
	but that, with future changes in its structure, Google Scholar will
	become an excellent free tool for scholarly information discovery
	and retrieval.
	
	Originality/value 鈥� Presents a useful analysis for potential users
	of the Google Scholar site.},
  doi = {10.1108/14684520510598066},
  keywords = {Internet, Reference services, Search engines},
  owner = {Administrator},
  timestamp = {2007.12.07},
  url = {http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/14684520510598066}
}

@ARTICLE{Kesselman2005,
  author = {Martin Kesselman AND Sarah Barbara Watstein},
  title = {Google Scholar鈩� and libraries: point/counterpoint},
  journal = {Reference Services Review},
  year = {2005},
  volume = {33},
  pages = {380 - 387},
  number = {4},
  abstract = {Purpose 鈥� The purpose of this article is to explore and expose some
	of the many facets of Google Scholar鈩� that have set the academic
	library world on edge. Google Scholar鈩�'s impact on reference and
	information literacy is considered, as are the challenges it poses
	for the library's web site.
	
	Design/methodology/approach 鈥� Includes opinions in a point/counterpoint
	format, as well as citations to recently published literature.
	
	Findings 鈥� Provides arguments about ignoring or leveraging the teachings
	of Scholar Google鈩� in conjunction with teaching the library's various
	subscription databases available through the library's web site.
	
	Originality/value 鈥� This paper fills an identified information need
	by offering original, practical advice to librarians.},
  doi = {10.1108/00907320510631535},
  keywords = {Academic libraries, Databases, Information management, Library studies,
	Reference services, Research},
  owner = {Administrator},
  timestamp = {2007.12.07},
  url = {http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/00907320510631535}
}

@ARTICLE{Paula2007,
  author = {Paula Kujansivu AND Antti L枚nnqvist},
  title = {Investigating the value and efficiency of intellectual capital},
  journal = {Journal of Intellectual Capital},
  year = {2007},
  volume = {8},
  pages = {272 - 287},
  number = {2},
  abstract = {Purpose 鈥� This paper seeks to provide an empirical view of the present
	state of intellectual capital (IC) in Finnish companies. It also
	examines the relationship between the concepts value of IC and efficiency
	of IC. 
	
	Design/methodology/approach 鈥� Calculated Intangible Value (CIV),
	which measures the monetary value of IC, and Value Added Intellectual
	Coefficient (VAICTM), which describes how a company's IC adds value
	to the company, were applied to approximately 20,000 companies per
	year during the period 2001-2003 and studied using correlation analysis.
	
	
	Findings 鈥� Value and efficiency of IC are described in 11 industries
	in both SMEs and large companies. The theoretically unclear relationship
	between the value and efficiency of IC remains vague even after the
	empirical analysis. Calculating the value of IC in relative terms
	by dividing the value of a company's IC by the value of its tangible
	assets was found to be illustrative in comparing different industries.
	
	
	Research limitations/implications 鈥� The measures used are based on
	financial statement information and their validity is questionable.
	However, the large set of data examined has a positive effect on
	the reliability of the study. 
	
	Practical implications 鈥� The results in this paper highlight the
	absolute or relative value, and thus importance, of IC for a company,
	depending on the industry. 
	
	Originality/value 鈥� The industry level analysis of IC and the implementation
	of scarcely used CIV measure in a large set of companies enhance
	the existing knowledge of the measurement of IC. The analysis of
	the relationship between CIV and VAICTM measures has not previously
	been done.},
  doi = {10.1108/14691930710742844},
  keywords = {Finland, Intangible assets, Intellectual capital, Performance measures},
  owner = {Administrator},
  timestamp = {2007.05.01},
  url = {http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/14691930710742844}
}

@ARTICLE{kwok2004ksc,
  author = {Kwok, J.S. Kwok and Gao, S.},
  title = {{Knowledge sharing community in P2P network: a study of motivational
	perspective}},
  journal = {Journal OF Knowledge Management},
  year = {2004},
  volume = {8},
  pages = {94-102},
  number = {1},
  publisher = {Emerald Group Publishing limited}
}

@ARTICLE{lin2007son,
  author = {Lin, C.P.},
  title = {{To share or not to share: modeling knowledge sharing using exchange
	ideology as a moderator}},
  journal = {Personnel Review},
  year = {2007},
  volume = {36},
  pages = {457--475},
  number = {3},
  publisher = {Emerald Group Publishing Limited}
}

@ARTICLE{Lynette2006,
  author = {Lynette Kvasny, Helen Richardson},
  title = {Critical research in information systems: looking forward,looking
	back},
  journal = {Information Technology \& People},
  year = {2006},
  volume = {19},
  pages = {3},
  doi = {10.1108/09593840610689813},
  keywords = {Information systems, Research, Social theories},
  owner = {fox},
  timestamp = {2008.08.19},
  url = {http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/09593840610689813}
}

@ARTICLE{marouf2007sna,
  author = {Marouf, L.N.},
  title = {{Social networks and knowledge sharing in organizations: a case study}},
  journal = {Journal of Knowledge Management},
  year = {2007},
  volume = {11},
  pages = {110--125},
  number = {6}
}

@ARTICLE{Mayr2007,
  author = {Philipp Mayr AND Anne-Kathrin Walter},
  title = {An exploratory study of Google Scholar},
  journal = {Online Information Review},
  year = {2007},
  volume = {31},
  pages = {814 - 830},
  number = {6},
  abstract = {Purpose 鈥� The purpose of this paper is to discuss the new scientific
	search service Google Scholar (GS). It aims to discuss this search
	engine, which is intended exclusively for searching scholarly documents,
	and then empirically test its most important functionality. The focus
	is on an exploratory study which investigates the coverage of scientific
	serials in GS.
	
	Design/methodology/approach 鈥� The study is based on queries against
	different journal lists: international scientific journals from Thomson
	Scientific (SCI, SSCI, AH), open access journals from the DOAJ list
	and journals from the German social sciences literature database
	SOLIS as well as the analysis of result data from GS. All data gathering
	took place in August 2006.
	
	Findings 鈥� The study shows deficiencies in the coverage and up-to-dateness
	of the GS index. Furthermore, the study points out which web servers
	are the most important data providers for this search service and
	which information sources are highly represented. The paper can show
	that there is a relatively large gap in Google Scholar's coverage
	of German literature as well as weaknesses in the accessibility of
	Open Access content. Major commercial academic publishers are currently
	the main data providers.
	
	Research limitations/implications 鈥� Five different journal lists
	were analysed, including approximately 9,500 single titles. The lists
	are from different fields and of various sizes. This limits comparability.
	There were also some problems matching the journal titles of the
	original lists to the journal title data provided by Google Scholar.
	The study was only able to analyse the top 100 Google Scholar hits
	per journal.
	
	Practical implications 鈥� The paper concludes that Google Scholar
	has some interesting pros (such as citation analysis and free materials)
	but the service cannot be seen as a substitute for the use of special
	abstracting and indexing databases and library catalogues due to
	various weaknesses (such as transparency, coverage and up-to-dateness).
	
	Originality/value 鈥� The authors do not know of any other study using
	such a brute force approach and such a large empirical basis. The
	study can be considered as using brute force in the sense that it
	gathered lots of data from Google and then analysed the data in a
	macroscopic way.},
  doi = {10.1108/14684520710841784},
  keywords = {Digital libraries, Electronic journals, Search engines, Serials, Worldwide
	web},
  owner = {Administrator},
  timestamp = {2007.12.07},
  url = {http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/14684520710841784}
}

@ARTICLE{mcdermott2001ocb,
  author = {McDermott, R. and O’Dell, C.},
  title = {Overcoming cultural barriers to sharing knowledge},
  journal = {Journal of Knowledge Management},
  year = {2001},
  volume = {5},
  pages = {76--85},
  number = {1},
  publisher = {MCB UP Ltd}
}

@ARTICLE{mehta2008skm,
  author = {Mehta, N.},
  title = {Successful knowledge management implementation in global software
	companies},
  journal = {Journal of Knowledge Management},
  year = {2008},
  volume = {12},
  pages = {42-56},
  number = {2},
  publisher = {Emerald Group Publishing Limited}
}

@ARTICLE{Mitchell2010,
  author = {Rebecca Mitchell  AND Brendan Boyle},
  title = {Knowledge creation measurement methods},
  journal = {Journal of Knowledge Management},
  year = {2010},
  volume = {14},
  pages = {67-82},
  number = {1},
  owner = {fox},
  timestamp = {2010.03.01}
}

@ARTICLE{Tomas2007,
  author = {Tom谩s M. Ba帽egil Palacios AND Ram贸n Sanguino Galv谩n},
  title = {Intangible measurement guidelines: a comparative study in Europe},
  journal = {Journal of Intellectual Capital},
  year = {2007},
  volume = {8},
  pages = {192 - 204},
  number = {2},
  abstract = {Purpose 鈥� The purpose of this paper is to present and compare some
	of the most recent and significant contributions from European researchers
	to the field of the measurement and management of intangibles. 
	
	Design/methodology/approach 鈥� The analysis was carried out on two
	different levels. First, how the guidelines were developed was examined.
	Second, the recommendations derived from these guidelines were evaluated.
	
	
	Findings 鈥� The first conclusion drawn in this paper is the lack of
	a unique Conceptual Framework to carry out Intellectual Capital Reports
	鈥� even though there are no significant differences among the analysed
	guidelines. 
	
	Originality/value 鈥� The paper shows that, in line with the increasing
	importance of the intangible economy in the last few years, a significant
	number of models has been published. Unlike previously published
	papers, the main original contribution in the measurement of Intellectual
	Capital relates to the comparison and assessment of the various existing
	guidelines.},
  doi = {10.1108/14691930710742790},
  keywords = {Europe, Intangible assets, Intellectual capital, Measurement},
  owner = {Administrator},
  timestamp = {2007.04.30},
  url = {http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/14691930710742790}
}

@ARTICLE{pan1998stv,
  author = {Pan, S.L. and Scarbrough, H.},
  title = {{A socio-technical view of knowledge-sharing at Buckman Laboratories}},
  journal = {Journal of Knowledge Management},
  year = {1998},
  volume = {2},
  pages = {55--66},
  number = {1},
  publisher = {MCB UP Ltd}
}

@ARTICLE{Pedrini2007,
  author = {Matteo Pedrini},
  title = {Human capital convergences in intellectual capital and sustainability
	reports},
  journal = {Journal of Intellectual Capital},
  year = {2007},
  volume = {8},
  pages = {346 - 366},
  abstract = {Purpose 鈥� The purpose of this paper is to examine the points of convergence
	between intellectual capital and corporate responsibility reports
	with a focus on human capital issues. 
	
	Design/methodology/approach 鈥� To investigate this degree of integration
	the paper analyzes the common elements between human capital accounting
	and the Global Reporting Initiative Guidelines 2002. The assessment
	methodology consists of a study of which indicators for employees
	proposed in GRI guidelines are frequently used in 20 international
	best practices for intellectual capital reports. 
	
	Findings 鈥� Results show a large overlapping of indicators around
	three issues: the description of human capital, the reporting on
	diversity and opportunity, and the measurement of the quality and
	intensity of training. 
	
	Research limitations/implications 鈥� The research is focused on human
	capital that is one of the three dimensions of intellectual capital.
	It could also be interesting to study the points of convergence between
	corporate responsibility and the remaining two dimensions of intellectual
	capital: network capital and organizational capital. 
	
	Practical implications 鈥� The results demonstrate that the opportunity
	exists to integrate intellectual capital and corporate responsibility
	report in a global report, that will be useful to orient the sustainability
	practices in developing human capital. 
	
	Originality/value 鈥� This paper sustains the possibility that a correct
	management of corporate responsibility practices will be an opportunity
	to develop intellectual capital and a source of value creation.},
  doi = {10.1108/14691930710742880},
  keywords = {Human capital, Intangible assets, Intellectual capital},
  owner = {Administrator},
  timestamp = {2007.05.01},
  url = {http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/14691930710742880}
}

@ARTICLE{riege2005tdk,
  author = {Riege, A.},
  title = {{Three-dozen knowledge-sharing barriers managers must consider The
	Authors}},
  journal = {Journal of Knowledge Management},
  year = {2005},
  volume = {9},
  pages = {18--35},
  number = {3}
}

@ARTICLE{Robinson2007,
  author = {Mary L. Robinson AND Judith Wusteman},
  title = {Putting Google Scholar to the test: a preliminary study},
  journal = {Program: electronic library and information systems},
  year = {2007},
  volume = {41},
  pages = {71 - 80},
  number = {1},
  abstract = {Purpose 鈥� To describe a small-scale quantitative evaluation of the
	scholarly information search engine, Google Scholar.
	
	Design/methodology/approach 鈥� Google Scholar's ability to retrieve
	scholarly information was compared to that of three popular search
	engines: Ask.com, Google and Yahoo! Test queries were presented to
	all four search engines and the following measures were used to compare
	them: precision; Vaughan's Quality of Result Ranking; relative recall;
	and Vaughan's Ability to Retrieve Top Ranked Pages.
	
	Findings 鈥� Significant differences were found in the ability to retrieve
	top ranked pages between Ask.com and Google and between Ask.com and
	Google Scholar for scientific queries. No other significant differences
	were found between the search engines. This may be due to the relatively
	small sample size of eight queries. Results suggest that, for scientific
	queries, Google Scholar has the highest precision, relative recall
	and Ability to Retrieve Top Ranked Pages. However, it achieved the
	lowest score for these three measures for non-scientific queries.
	The best overall score for all four measures was achieved by Google.
	Vaughan's Quality of Result Ranking found a significant correlation
	between Google and scientific queries.
	
	Research limitations/implications 鈥� As with any search engine evaluation,
	the results pertain only to performance at the time of the study
	and must be considered in light of any subsequent changes in the
	search engine's configuration or functioning. Also, the relatively
	small sample size limits the scope of the study's findings.
	
	Practical implications 鈥� These results suggest that, although Google
	Scholar may prove useful to those in scientific disciplines, further
	development is necessary if it is to be useful to the scholarly community
	in general.
	
	Originality/value 鈥� This is a preliminary study in applying the accepted
	performance measures of precision and recall to Google Scholar. It
	provides information specialists and users with an objective evaluation
	of Google Scholar's abilities across both scientific and non-scientific
	disciplines and paves the way for a larger study.},
  doi = {10.1108/00330330710724908},
  keywords = {Information retrieval, Precision, Search engines},
  owner = {Administrator},
  timestamp = {2007.12.07},
  url = {http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/00330330710724908}
}

@ARTICLE{Rodgers2007,
  author = {Waymond Rodgers},
  title = {Problems and resolutions to future knowledge-based assets reporting},
  journal = {Journal of Intellectual Capital},
  year = {2007},
  volume = {8},
  pages = {205 - 215},
  number = {2},
  abstract = {Purpose 鈥� The purpose of this paper is to provide a measurement system
	of knowledge-based assets for graduate students, researchers and
	practitioners which can help them enhance their understanding of
	valuation issues. 
	
	Design/methodology/approach 鈥� Three types of validity are reported
	to be relevant for the purposes of understanding knowledge-based
	assets information systems: criterion validity 鈥� establishment of
	a statistical relationship with a knowledge-based information system
	and productivity; content validity 鈥� representation of a specified
	universe of contents in the knowledge-based information system; construct
	validity 鈥� measurement of knowledge. 
	
	Findings 鈥� A framework is provided that helps explain why measurement
	is important in deciding characteristics such as information value,
	cost, reliability, validity, and bias (random and non-random error)
	which is germane to the development of an efficient and effective
	knowledge-based assets information system. 
	
	Practical implications 鈥� The paper is a very useful source of information
	for graduate students, researchers and practitioners involved with
	testing, designing, valuing and/or implementing a knowledge-based
	information system. 
	
	Originality/value 鈥� A measurement model is presented that may spark
	future models that can be implemented, tested and translated into
	actions in various organizational settings.},
  doi = {10.1108/14691930710742808},
  keywords = {Financial reporting, Intangible assets, Measurement},
  owner = {Administrator},
  timestamp = {2007.04.30},
  url = {http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/14691930710742808}
}

@ARTICLE{sackmann2007eci,
  author = {Sackmann, S.A. and Friesl, M.},
  title = {{Exploring cultural impacts on knowledge sharing behavior in project
	teams-results from a simulation study}},
  journal = {Journal of Knowledge Management},
  year = {2007},
  volume = {11},
  pages = {142--156},
  number = {6}
}

@ARTICLE{scholl2004fkm,
  author = {Scholl, W. and K{\"o}nig, C. and Meyer, B. and Heisig, P.},
  title = {{The future of knowledge management: an international delphi study}},
  journal = {Journal of Knowledge Management},
  year = {2004},
  volume = {8},
  pages = {19--35},
  number = {2},
  publisher = {Emerald Group Publishing Limited}
}

@ARTICLE{Riccardo2006,
  author = {Riccardo Silvi AND Suresh Cuganesan},
  title = {Investigating the management of knowledge for competitive advantage:
	A strategic cost management perspective},
  journal = {Journal of Intellectual Capital},
  year = {2006},
  volume = {7},
  pages = {309 - 323},
  number = {3},
  abstract = {Purpose 鈥� The purpose of this paper is to develop and apply a framework
	that examines the effectiveness and efficiency of managing knowledge
	in organizations for competitive advantage. 
	
	Design/methodology/approach 鈥� Reviews knowledge management and strategic
	cost management literatures to identify key elements that determine
	and facilitate the enhancement of competitive advantage. Develops
	a cost-knowledge management (CKM) framework that integrates these
	elements and enables the analysis of how knowledge utilization in
	organizational activities can be made more effective and efficient.
	
	
	Findings 鈥� The CKM framework is usefully applied to a sample of four
	Italian firms operating in the mechanical industry. Both the results
	of applying the CKM framework and the insights that are generated
	are discussed. 
	
	Practical implications 鈥� The CKM framework allows organizations to
	analyze the activities performed in terms of cost structure and cost
	drivers, value created, and knowledge utilized, the latter in terms
	of knowledge specificity and type. The framework can also be used
	to highlight specific areas of effectiveness improvements in terms
	of identifying which activities should be leveraged and how knowledge
	can be better mobilized. In addition, the framework enables an assessment
	of the non value added but required and waste elements of organizational
	activities and the specific drivers of costs in these activities,
	thereby enabling an identification of efficiency improvement opportunities.
	
	
	Originality/value 鈥� This paper integrates strategic cost management
	and knowledge management perspectives to examine how organizations
	can usefully analyze and improve the effectiveness and efficiency
	of managing knowledge for competitive advantage. Thus far, this integration
	has not occurred in either literatures.},
  doi = {10.1108/14691930610681429},
  keywords = {Activity based costs, Asset valuation, Budgetary control, Competitive
	advantage, Knowledge management, Strategic objectives},
  owner = {Administrator},
  timestamp = {2007.05.09},
  url = {http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/14691930610681429}
}

@ARTICLE{Sudi2006,
  author = {Sudi Sudarsanam AND Ghulam Sorwar AND Bernard Marr},
  title = {Real options and the impact of intellectual capital on corporate
	value},
  journal = {Journal of Intellectual Capital},
  year = {2006},
  volume = {7},
  pages = {291 - 308},
  number = {3},
  abstract = {Purpose 鈥� The aim of this paper is to discuss intellectual capital
	(IC) from a valuation perspective and examine the nature of such
	capital and why traditional valuation methods fail to reflect the
	unique characteristics of IC and propose an alternative approach
	that captures them. 
	
	Design/methodology/approach 鈥� The paper builds on the existing literature
	in the fields of financial valuation and IC. The analysis of these
	fields allows us to combine them and discuss the possible usage and
	limitations of real option models for the assessment of intellectual
	capital in firms. 
	
	Findings 鈥� A valuation perspective is developed based on the real
	option models that have been extended from their origin in financial
	asset valuation to the valuation of firms' growth opportunities.
	Intellectual resources embody these opportunities contributing to
	both their evolution over time and their realisation in future. A
	typology of IC is developed based on the influence upon the various
	valuation parameters of real options. This approach provides a richer
	framework to analyse the relationship between IC and corporate value.
	
	
	Practical implications 鈥� Clarification of the relationship between
	IC and managerial flexibility as a source of value will help managers
	understand how they can create and leverage such flexibility to create
	value. The paper enables managers to understand how different types
	of IC impact on risk taking, timing of investment projects and the
	value of speculative investments. 
	
	Originality/value 鈥� The paper clarifies the nature of IC in the way
	it contributes to managerial flexibility to gain competitive advantage
	and exploit growth opportunities. It extends the real options valuation
	framework to the valuation of intellectual assets thus providing
	a link among intellectual assets, business strategy and firm value.},
  doi = {10.1108/14691930610681410},
  keywords = {Assets valuation, Intellectual capital, Intellectual property, Market
	value},
  owner = {Administrator},
  timestamp = {2007.05.09},
  url = {http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/14691930610681410}
}

@ARTICLE{Taylor2007,
  author = {Stephanie Taylor},
  title = {Google Scholar 鈥� friend or foe?},
  journal = {Interlending \& Document Supply},
  year = {2007},
  volume = {35},
  pages = {4-6},
  number = {1},
  abstract = {Purpose 鈥� The purpose of this article is to review and summarise
	the service offered by Google Scholar (GS).
	
	Design/methodology/approach 鈥� This is the first of two articles on
	GS, the second of which will explore the ways that UK libraries are
	dealing with Google. Both deal with the subject with particular reference
	to document supply.
	
	Findings 鈥� The article finds that on a practical level, GS has some
	work to do, but has the potential to be a useful resource. However,
	the implications of the presentation and branding of the search environment
	raise some important concerns. On a conceptual level, the question
	is a little more difficult. GS raises some important questions for
	library-based document delivery services about the ongoing role of
	the library as the hub at the centre of this service.
	
	Originality/value 鈥� The article provides a useful overview of today's
	hot topic which includes a list of resources for further reading
	and help.},
  doi = {10.1108/02641610710728122},
  keywords = {Document delivery, Interlending, United Kingdom},
  owner = {Administrator},
  timestamp = {2007.12.07},
  url = {http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/02641610710728122}
}

@ARTICLE{wei2008fsi,
  author = {Wei, J. and Stankosky, M. and Calabrese, F. and Lu, L.},
  title = {{A framework for studying the impact of national culture on knowledge
	sharing motivation in virtual teams}},
  journal = {VINE},
  year = {2008},
  volume = {38},
  pages = {221--231},
  number = {2},
  publisher = {Emerald Group Publishing Limited}
}

@ARTICLE{Abdullah2007,
  author = {Abdullah Yalama AND Metin Coskun},
  title = {Intellectual capital performance of quoted banks on the Istanbul
	stock exchange market},
  journal = {Journal of Intellectual Capital},
  year = {2007},
  volume = {8},
  pages = {256 - 271},
  number = {2},
  abstract = {Purpose 鈥� The purpose of the paper is to obtain measure of the intellectual
	capital (IC) performance of quoted banks on the Istanbul Stock Exchange
	Market (ISE) in Turkey for the period 1995-2004 and test the effect
	of the intellectual capital performance on profitability. 
	
	Design/methodology/approach 鈥� Data required for calculating intellectual
	capital efficiencies were obtained from the ISE for the period 1995-2004.
	The authors measured the intellectual capital performance of quoted
	banks in ISE using the efficiency coefficient, called Value Added
	Intellectual Coefficiency (VAICTM), and tested the effect of this
	intellectual capital performance on profitability using Data Envelopment
	Analysis (DEA). In addition, three different portfolios were constructed
	based on three different inputs to observe the effect of the intellectual
	capital on investors' behavior. 
	
	Findings 鈥� The effect of intellectual capital on profitability on
	the banking sector on the ISE was calculated as 61.3 percent on average
	and Portfolio-1, which uses the intellectual capital measure as an
	input, yields the highest returns among the three portfolios constructed.
	
	
	Research limitations/implications 鈥� The study was applied only to
	quoted banks on the ISE for the period 1995-2004. 
	
	Practical implications 鈥� The findings allow the banks to benchmark
	themselves based on the level of IC efficiency ranking, which is
	important for the banking sector to develop a strategic plan for
	their future performance. It may also be deduced that intellectual
	capital is an important factor for investors. 
	
	Originality/value 鈥� This paper can be considered as one of the most
	comprehensive studies on testing the effect of intellectual capital
	performance on profitability in the banking sector using both VAIC
	and DEA.},
  doi = {10.1108/14691930710742835},
  keywords = {Banks, Intellectual capital, Stock exchanges, Turkey, Value added},
  owner = {Administrator},
  timestamp = {2007.05.01},
 }

@article{korfiatis2006evaluating,
  title={{Evaluating authoritative sources using social networks: an insight from Wikipedia}},
  author={Korfiatis, N.T. and Poulos, M. and Bokos, G.},
  journal={Online Information Review},
  volume={30},
  number={3},
  pages={252--262},
  year={2006},
  publisher={Emerald Group Publishing Limited}
}
